As many of you know, the city of Minneapolis issued a request for proposals in November and will soon be entering into a new three year contract for the processing of collected recyclables. This decision will have an impact on the environment and on Minneapolis' recycling program for many years and is an opportunity to keep recycling in Minneapolis sustainable.
On February 17, the Minneapolis Transportation and Public Works Committee was unable to make a clear recommendation: * Councilmembers Sandy Colvin Roy and Robert Lilligren voted to negotiate with BFI. * Councilmember Scott Benson voted for the staff recommendation of WMI. * Councilmembers Dean Zimmermann and Gary Schiff voted to work with Eureka Recycling. * Councilmember Barret Lane was absent. The issue was forwarded to the Way and Means Committee without a recommendation. The Ways and Means Committee includes Councilmembers Barbara Johnson (chair), Natalie Johnson Lee, Paul Zerby, Dan Niziolek, Sandy Colvin Roy and Barret Lane. They are likely to discuss a report being prepared by the Finance Staff on Monday, March 15th and make their recommendation. Then the issue will move to the full city council. Eureka Recycling, BFI and Recycle America Alliance (a subsidiary of Waste Management Inc., WMI) have offered proposals to be the city's recycling processor. The Minneapolis Public Works staff recommended WMI each time they reviewed the proposals, despite the fact the Eureka Recycling offered the city the best price overall in the first and second rounds of analysis. Now Eureka Recycling and BFI's proposals are virtually identical (the estimated difference is less than one percent). BFI improved their proposal significantly when the committee reopened the process to allow proposers to change their original offers. With proposals within one percent in the obvious financial evaluation, this is the time to evaluate the other benefits of a contract for recycling processing, including the benefits to the community and the environment. This is where Eureka Recycling cannot be beat. This contract is expected to generate revenues for both the city of Minneapolis and the contractor that does the recycling processing. The city would receive approximately $1,250,000 annually while revenues would be approximately $730,000 for either Eureka Recycling or BFI. (WMI, in their "fixed rate scenario," would keep significantly more of the revenues.) Eureka Recycling is the only proposer that would reinvest any revenues after costs back into the community. We have a proven track record of providing award-winning programs and services that improve the environment with all of our proceeds. BFI and WMI would send any profits to their corporate headquarters in Texas and eventually disperse them to their shareholders. During this process it has been stated that the non-cost related benefits of working with a local, nonprofit environmental organization cannot be considered under this proposal process because they are not required criteria. But financial impact is a criteria and there is a true economic benefit to the community if Eureka Recycling is allowed to apply these dollars in the community to improve the environment and promote waste reduction. This is how a city makes recycling sustainable. Visit www.eurekarecycling.org to learn more. Posted by Dianna Kennedy Eureka Recycling Longfellow resident REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
